The video is more interesting then I thought it would be, but I'm not sure there is much demand for Brothers in Arms with aliens, which is what it looked like. The graphics look good, but they are still being vague about some of the strategic aspects of it.

But in general I agree that the whole idea doesn't make much sense. "Hey, lets use this classic game license to make a game that even we admit isn't the same universe and has totally different gameplay and completely different aliens." Seems like they could have saved a few bucks and just launched as a new IP and had just as much chance selling the idea. The X-Com fans seem passionately angry about it, but I seriously doubt this approach is going to appeal the console shooter fans anyway. So worst of both worlds.

Logged

Roger: And you should know, I have no genitals.Syndey: That's alright. I have both.

They could still salvage this train wreck by removing all association with the X-Com name. They're only hurting themselves by using it. Sure, it's giving them a little media attention (but not that much), but pretty much every X-Com fan hates them for it (to the best of my knowledge, at least), and the rest of the market won't be swayed either way by the title.

This kind of reminds me of the Star Control 4 (titled StarCon) disaster. In that situation they kept the name of the series but removed pretty much every other aspect of it so that the original creators (who owned the aliens, the story, and so on from the original games) wouldn't be able to have any influence over the brand. It ended predictably, with the game receiving massive flak from Star Control fans and eventually being canceled, leaving the Star Control series dead ever since.

I'll put aside my own "name rage" feelings to say I do see some promise, esp. in terms of the tactical "pause" interface and a renewed emphasis on squaddie-ness. Perhaps I might enjoy it in the way I did the couple SWAT tactical series (SWAT 3 and 4) or Brothers in Arms, maybe even Freedom Force.

It's just, when it isn't in that Tactical interface mode, it honestly looks like a humdrum pew-pew shooter with a few alien bits of wackiness to liven things up. And I'm just not sure the masses will enlist for a game where every encounter is a puzzle that they sort through their tactical interface for a solution for. I actually like the sound of that, but I've liked a lot of tactical shooter games that never quite found a mass audience causes the masses generally are happier simply "blowing **** up."

At the least, it seems to have more promise and ambition than some of the official X-Com non-RTS dreck (Enforcer, Interceptor etc.).

So we’ve been flying under the radar with XCOM, for about a year – and felt that it was about time to put together a little video update in order to lift the curtain on the reasons why.

2K Marin had just finished working on BioShock 2, and that game will always be deep in our DNA – but our first crack at adapting XCOM to a more personal, real-time experience was way too much within our creative ‘comfort zone’. It was kind of a run-and-gun affair, without a lot of focus on the command of your squad, or indeed on tactical play itself.

Candidly, it just wasn’t “XCOM” enough for the hardcore fans of the original games at 2K Marin, who serve as our creative conscience. So over the past year, we’ve made some pretty aggressive design changes, in pursuit of the feelings that we experienced when we played the original games. I’ll cover those in the video itself, but a quick note about story:

Narratively, XCOM is an all-new origin story in its own timeline; a deliberate reimagining along the lines of something like Battlestar: Galactica or Batman Begins. What that means in practical terms is that while we take narrative inspiration from the original games, we have also deviated in a couple of key ways. For example, our game is set in 1962 within the continental United States – at the moment the XCOM organization is formed.

We wanted to tell the story of the first man on the ground – exaggerating cold-war fears about invasion from within – via this alien threat for which there is no precedent. And we felt the best way to express that kind of intimate take on the XCOM universe is from that character’s perspective: limited information, overwhelming odds, and direct personal involvement.

In our XCOM, you play William Carter, Special Agent in Charge of field operations at XCOM. So as you start up the video, I’d like you to slip into his shoes as he reviews a piece of evidence which was discovered somewhere out there in mid-century America.

I think one thing you really can't easily transfer from the original couple games to a shooter is that sense of dread on the turn-based ground battles where you couldn't quite see what was lurking around the corner until you moved a trooper or turned him in a certain direction (fog of war). I don't know if there's a good way to have that in a shooter per se.

So we’ve been flying under the radar with XCOM, for about a year – and felt that it was about time to put together a little video update in order to lift the curtain on the reasons why.

2K Marin had just finished working on BioShock 2, and that game will always be deep in our DNA – but our first crack at adapting XCOM to a more personal, real-time experience was way too much within our creative ‘comfort zone’. It was kind of a run-and-gun affair, without a lot of focus on the command of your squad, or indeed on tactical play itself.

Candidly, it just wasn’t “XCOM” enough for the hardcore fans of the original games at 2K Marin, who serve as our creative conscience. So over the past year, we’ve made some pretty aggressive design changes, in pursuit of the feelings that we experienced when we played the original games. I’ll cover those in the video itself, but a quick note about story:

Narratively, XCOM is an all-new origin story in its own timeline; a deliberate reimagining.... along the lines of something like Battlestar: Galactica or Batman Begins. What that means in practical terms is that while we take narrative inspiration from the original games, we have also deviated in a couple of key ways. For example, our game is set in 1962 within the continental United States – at the moment the XCOM organization is formed.

We wanted to tell the story of the first man on the ground – exaggerating cold-war fears about invasion from within – via this alien threat for which there is no precedent. And we felt the best way to express that kind of intimate take on the XCOM universe is from that character’s perspective: limited information, overwhelming odds, and direct personal involvement.

In our XCOM, you play William Carter, Special Agent in Charge of field operations at XCOM. So as you start up the video, I’d like you to slip into his shoes as he reviews a piece of evidence which was discovered somewhere out there in mid-century America.

I think one thing you really can't easily transfer from the original couple games to a shooter is that sense of dread on the turn-based ground battles where you couldn't quite see what was lurking around the corner until you moved a trooper or turned him in a certain direction (fog of war). I don't know if there's a good way to have that in a shooter per se.

I find it amusing that they created a game that isn't at all like x-com because Bioshock wasn't "x-com" enough for the hardcore players. I'd love to know which hardcore players he's talking about. Does this guy actually believe his own BS? I'd love to give the guy some credit for whatever worth the game has, but he keeps dragging us back down that road.

That said, I think the game looks like it has potential. I just hate how they keep trying to beat us over the head with how much more awesome their version of the IP is because they are smarter than us.

I find it amusing that they created a game that isn't at all like x-com because Bioshock wasn't "x-com" enough for the hardcore players. I'd love to know which hardcore players he's talking about. Does this guy actually believe his own BS? I'd love to give the guy some credit for whatever worth the game has, but he keeps dragging us back down that road.

You misread the quote. What they're saying is that their first vision for X-COM was too much within their "comfort zone" as Bioshock developers, resembling that game too much. The hardcore fans they're talking about are within their own team, people who (supposedly) protested against the direction the game design was heading.

Even so, the quote is still BS. It reads too much like "okay, here's what we've got. Let's make up some excuses.".

So who told 2K Marin that envisioning the belated return of Mythos and MicroProse's X-Com franchise as a frenetic FPS was the way forward? 2K Games president Christoph Harmann did.

"Every studio we had wanted to do it and each one had its own spin on it," Harmann said to MCV back in July. "But the problem was that turn-based strategy games were no longer the hottest thing on planet Earth.But this is not just a commercial thing – strategy games are just not contemporary."

Yeesh, the underlined seems a bit of over-generalization, and clearly he didn't pay attention to Starcraft 2's sales last year. And I hate to think one of 2K's studios pitched an idea closer to the X-COM source material and got squelched for not being "contemporary" enough.

Quote

The industry's perception of what gamers want right now is wrong, blighted by billion-dollar concerns and based on an uneducated bias they help to create themselves. In the same way that Metacritic is deceptively misrepresentative of how good or bad a game actually is, so too are the sales charts incorrect when it comes to quantifying who's enjoying what out there and why. The reality is, we're not being given the choice. We're being given shooter after shooter, year after year, because one company hit it out of the park one time and big money fell in line [I assume he means Call of Duty: Modern Warfare, although he could mean many things?-bj].

How many turn-based games has the mainstream actually received this generation? Even if you're missing a few fingers, you can count them on two hands. It's a snowball effect only made bigger and rollier by the surface appraisals of guys like Harmann.

He also shares some praise for Frozen Synapse on PC, Tom Clancy's Shadow Wars on 3DS and a few others keeping the turn-based candles lit.

While I have some hopes this will be OK (and given the FPS Fallout's success, I don't to some extent blame 2K for thinking it can revamp this as well), I hope it doesn't crush the possibility someone might do, you know, another true X-COM strategy title, whether it's like the original (though who can envision a big publisher bankrolling a turn-based squad game right now?), or is more "pausable real time" (i.e., maybe something closer to Freedom Force). I have probably tried all of the often horribly buggy European made unofficial X-COM knockoffs at one time or another and nothing ever evoked the same feeling in me as the original (or even X-COM From The Deep).

The problem is that the big publishers are stuck on only making "AAA" titles right now. And if you give a game a AAA budget you want to maximize your potential return. It would be as if Hollywood only made movies designed to be blockbusters and didn't also budget for mid and small budget titles as well. The big game publishers are headed for disaster if they continue this AAA only approach because inevitably those big bets are going to fail to pay off adequately to keep the publisher going.

Logged

Roger: And you should know, I have no genitals.Syndey: That's alright. I have both.

I just wish they'd stop yakking about how it's "still X-COM" or "it's like X-COM except you're a grunt in 1950s attire rather than a commander" etc. Just tell us what's cool about the game, 2K, and stop trying to convince us "it's still X-COM."

To some extent, I'm at peace. It's no different than X-COM Interceptor, X-COM Enforcer

It's true, and look at how fondly we talk about them when they come up in discussions... or how fondly we would talk about them if anyone felt they were important enough to waste time discussing in the first place.

Rumour: Fresh Staff Cuts At 2K’s Canberra Studiohttp://www.kotaku.com.au/2011/10/rumour-new-staff-cuts-at-2ks-canberra-studio/*Assuming it's true, I guess it could just mean they're close to finishing the game. These days, if you're not working on an MMO or some uber-franchise it seems like finishing a game project is practically signing your own pink slip unless the studio has another big game to assign you to right away. No wonder games get delayed so often.

The breathless buzz off this Kotaku "rumor report," is they may have revamped this into a console-only, $30 squad-action third person shooter. Apparently the geniuses behind XCOM: Enforcer and XCOM: Alliance (unreleased) are at work again....

First seen by the public as a uniquely retro first-person shooter, these screenshots sent in by a Kotaku reader - part of what we're told was a recent marketing survey - suggest the game has gone back to the drawing board, coming back as a third-person shooter.

While the 1960s setting and general XCOM prequel vibe remains, it's now apparently being pitched as a squad-based game similar to SOCOM or Republic Commando, with the player in command of a team of agents, which you can order around the map to perform various actions.

The survey suggests the game is still in development at 2K Marin (it was originally being led by 2K's Canberra team before all the delays), as it tells the user that "it is being developed by the same people who created BioShock 2".

If that's not interesting enough, the survey takers are also being told the game would be for PS3 and Xbox 360 (with no mention of PC), and are being asked how they'd feel if it was made available as a $30 downloadable title, as opposed to a $60 retail game.

I guessed they realized what a commercial and PR disaster this game would have been (particularly after the glowing reception to its bigger brother) and decided to cut their losses. I'd rather they just canceled the whole thing without tainting the XCOM brand with it, but it's not my money they're spending so my vote doesn't count.

which i admit is kind of a bummer - some of the earlier stuff they posted, while UGLY actually seemed a bit cool and would have been 1000Xs more great knowing that i had a "real" xcom to play as well

the company has already publicly gone "back to the drawing board" at least once and probably twice, so im more inclined to think that while this might not be 100% true, there probably is something to them testing the waters on another revamp - which cant be good news. it either means they arent close (no one market tests something when the something is near completion) or they wont be close (they WERE close, but now its time for ANOTHER revamp)

IGN has a 20-minute gameplay video. The game looks amazingly similar to Mass Effect, even down to the psi powers. It looks like a lot of fun, though, so I hope it turns out well after all the development difficulties.

« Last Edit: July 04, 2013, 11:59:13 AM by EddieA »

Logged

"Why did the chicken cross the Mobius strip? To get to the same side." - The Big Bang Theory

It's an official promotion for the game, but one that is quite odd. Kinda funny. It's basically a guy going through office situations after he's getting in late after being hung over from playing The Bureau and drinking. It's FMV, with prompts that come up just like in the game to have coworkers do stuff for you.

i hope this game is what i think it is, as ive been looking forward to it, especially now that i have a proper xcom as well. i actually thought this game would never see the light of day more than once - cant believe its only 2 weeks away! any word on a demo?

To be honest, while I might end up playing this Mass Effect meets XCOM game, I was actually way more interested in their original take on X-COM when it was first shown. People complained so much about the game, and all that got them was just a generic 3rd person shooter with mass effect powers and the XCOM aliens tossed in.

I was more interested in the alien black goo, the blocky alien infiltrators, the weird devices you'd use to eventually defeat them, with an emphasis on investigation and more open areas that they were originally going for.

To be honest, while I might end up playing this Mass Effect meets XCOM game, I was actually way more interested in their original take on X-COM when it was first shown. People complained so much about the game, and all that got them was just a generic 3rd person shooter with mass effect powers and the XCOM aliens tossed in.

I was more interested in the alien black goo, the blocky alien infiltrators, the weird devices you'd use to eventually defeat them, with an emphasis on investigation and more open areas that they were originally going for.

Gah, same here. That shooter looked pretty awesome. It pushed the limits of what the hardware could do too. Really does make you agree with Kaz when he said that gamers don't know what they want....seems like most of em don't.

I was more interested in the alien black goo, the blocky alien infiltrators, the weird devices you'd use to eventually defeat them, with an emphasis on investigation and more open areas that they were originally going for.

to be honest while i HATED the initial ugly "blocky" look of the game, i DID reread this thread recently and have to admit some of the open area investigation aspects mentioned in 2010 ( I don't know the emote for the bug eyed smiley but I'm sure you know the one) sounded very interesting. the stuff about taking pictures and collecting evidence, while juggling increasing and impossible danger vs more investigation sounded promising.

and i said it before so ill say it again - once a "real" xcom came out these guys had MUCH more leeway with their reimaging than they did initially. im very curious to see what they eventually produced!

Actually, they had less leeway. Have you seen all they've shown of the game, it's a whole lot of shooting and powers that would make Mass Effect envious. It's literally everything XCOM gamers would have hated in gameplay, and all because they got angry because it just happened to look slightly different. Instead of interesting mystery, you got the now bog standard enemy types.

I consider sectoids, mutons, ethereals and whatever crappy men in rubber suit aliens they come up with to be pretty uninteresting in terms of mysterious threat. Maybe in the old style of pure military destructiveness, sure. But those type of enemies quickly become "known" rather than really evoking the "Enemy Unknown" in the long term.

But weird infiltrators, the black goo? That's stuff that could stay mysterious for a while. Sure, you weren't gunning them down left and right in turn based mode, but it sure beats gunning them down in third person shooter, and now that's what we got because some X-COM groupies got their panties in a bunch.

well, pre-ordered off of Green Man Gaming for the $12 credit, which will go towards Battlefield 4, whose $12 credit will go towards Arkham Origins along with the 20% off code.

Kind of annoyed, as when the purchase was done it listed a key, and it lists the same key under the games section in my account, so I figured I could enter it into Steam and it would show up in my library until I could download it (like they did with Shadowrun Returns). well, turns out that key is for Spec Ops The Line, which I already have but Steam accepted anyways. Essentially I wasted a key I could give to someone else. I see on their forums that I'm not the only one.

Logged

Because I can,also because I don't care what you want.XBL: OriginalCeeKayWii U: CeeKay

Here's a nearly hour-long video showing off another mission. The developer mentions that the PC will have a unique toolbar-based interface, presumably in place of the radial-menu interface (although that is available in the PC version as well).

Logged

"Why did the chicken cross the Mobius strip? To get to the same side." - The Big Bang Theory